Welcome to esiq.org

Copyright infringement case Learning Copyright Law through Copyright Infringement Cases Copyright infringement cases can be both costly and time consuming. Considering copyright infringement is something that isn’t as easily defined as theft or speeding, there are numerous copyright infringement cases that are changing the way copyright law is viewed in the United States of America. By reviewing a few of these copyright infringement cases, you’ll be able to get a better idea of what is, and is not, acceptable use of copyrighted works. As a forward, however, you’ll need to know a little bit about copyright law. Most copyright lawsuits are brought to the courts because a copyright owner has found their copyright is being used outside the copyright laws. This usually means that the copyright holder hadn’t been asked for permission to use the work, or if they had, that the work is not being used in an agreed-upon context or they have not been paid royalties. The copyright infringement cases, listed below, give a sampling of what goes to the Supreme Court in copyright infringement. Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service Co (6th Cir. 1996) This copyright infringement case was brought upon the Supreme Court in 1996 regarding the copyright of a database. The supreme court, in this instance, decided that compilations of data (such as in a database) are only protected by copyright when they are “arranged and selected in an original manner.” Although the level of originality needed to make the database copyright-able is not very high, the pages of a directory such as a phone book are not protect-able because the data contained therein is arranged geographically, then alphabetically. Because of this, the data was not original enough to warrant a copyright infringement charge, and the competing telephone company was allowed to tap into their competitors’ database and use that data in their own work without liability. Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Services, Inc (6th Cir 1996) This case has to do with the ‘fair use’ law, which is defined in the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 107. In this case, a photocopying service was sued for copyright infringement for making ‘course packs’ for the University of Michigan. In this case, a course pack was a group of reading materials assigned by a professor – then the course pack was bound together by a professional copy shop. In the fair use system, there is a system available for payment of copyright fees to publishers whose works are used in course materials, the printing shop owner refused to pay the copyright cost. When it went to the Supreme Court, they analyzed the fair use code and found that it was NOT fair use, and the printing shop had to pay the copyright costs. As you can see, copyright infringement cases are cases in which someone violates the rights of a copyright owner, as provided by 17 USC §106, or of the author as provided in §106A. These copyright infringement cases can be taken to either criminal or civil court, and can carry with it a hefty fine. Copyright infringement cases are brought upon people who violate copyrights every day. In recent times, you’ll find many copyright cases in relation to electronic copyrights – such as those you’d find on a website or PDF file, as well as other digital media such as music and audio files. It’s probable that you’ve seen copyright cases brought against the common person – such as a child or family – for downloading digital music in the form of MP3s. In the current internet age we’re in, it’s not surprising to see so many music and video copyright cases brought to us because of peer to peer file sharing made possible by the internet. You can be certain that until people know the rules of copyright, and downloading copyrighted material from the internet that we’ll see many more copyright cases.

Can Facebook or MySpace Help You Land a Job? The Internet is quickly becoming the vehicle of choice for people looking for a job and for employers looking for people to hire. There are many job sites on the Internet dedicated to matching up employees and employers, and most people turn to the Internet today when they are hunting for a job instead of turning to the classified ads in the local paper. Job hunting websites may all be well and good when you are looking for a job, but what about social networking sites. Everyone knows how popular sites like Facebook and MySpace are online, but can they help you get a job? If you are in the job market, can these sites be your foot in the door, or a one way ticket to the unemployment line? The answer is that there is no easy answer. To know if you can find a job using Facebook or MySpace, you have to know how employers feel about these sites, and employers have mixed feeling about them. Some companies are actively using social networking sites to track down employees that meet their company’s employee profile and have had great success finding workers via social networking sites. Other companies wouldn’t touch these sites as a hiring tool with a ten-foot poll – in fact, many companies don’t even want you to access these websites from their company computers. The real answer to this question has more to do with exactly what kind of job you are looking for. Are you looking for an executive position at a company? Then stay off of the social networking sites, at least for job hunting (and maybe all together). No company is going to look for its top brass on a social networking site, and you will be wasting your time. However, if you are looking for entry level or hourly wage work, the social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook may be the answer for you. Many hourly wage employers in particular, like fast food restaurant chains and mall stores, use MySpace and Facebook to look for potential employees in their area. If a potential employer sees your profile and thinks you may be a good fit for their company, they will send you an email or an instant message and get the ball rolling. You should also, however, carefully consider the downsides of using social networking sites as a job tool – and you should carefully consider how and if you use these sites at all if you are in the market for a new job. Most people wouldn’t want their parents to see their social networking site profile, let alone potential employers. If you have rude and off color material, political or religious material, and inappropriate photos of yourself on your profile, a potential employer will be turned off, and you might lose your chance at that job. Most people give up way too much of their privacy when they use these kinds of sites, and your social networking site profile may offer a window into a side of you an employer might not be overly impressed with. Further, you can open yourself up to danger by using these sites to job hunt. If someone approached you in the street and offered you a job, would you accept? Then why would you accept a face value an approach by someone on social networking site? If you do get approached for an interview, never meet anyone in a private place, and do your homework to make sure the facts check out before you go for the interview. One last reality check – there are over 60 million users on MySpace alone. How will an employer find you in the crowd? MySpace and Facebook may help you in your job hunt, but don’t count on them as your sole avenue into the job market.

Software company patent A Software Company Patent is the Door to a World of Confusion There is no universal understanding of exactly what a software company patent is. In general, owning a patent allows a company certain rights (or exclusivity) for a prescribed amount of time. Individuals or corporations seeking a patent must apply for a patent in each and every country in which they wish to have one. Unlike copyrights, patents are not automatically granted to applicants and can take quite a while in order to be approved. Another thing to remember, particularly with a software company patent, is that a patent may issue in one or more of the countries in which you've applied but not all of them. The real problem lies in the fact that there really is no central agreement about what a software company patent actually grants among any of the nations so those who are awarded patents may not be getting exactly what they think they are getting in the process. With no universal agreement there really can't be universal enforcement about the laws and the rights surrounding a software company patent. The growth of Internet business and e-commerce in general has led to many patent applications for software, particularly software that was designed for specific business applications. The problem is that while the cases are granted and successfully tried and defended in some countries, other countries offer no enforcement or legal recourse for those who do not honor the software company patent even if the patents were granted in those countries. The fine line between nations about what is and isn't patentable is another challenge when it comes to establishing and honoring patents. In other words, the issue of a software company patent is a rather confusing process at best. Patents differ greatly from copyrights, which are issued automatically and recognized and enforced internationally. Copyrights protect the source code of software from being copied and registration is generally not required in order for your work to be protected. Lately there is a new term, copyleft, which is an obvious play on words and represents the rights to not only redistribute the works that are covered by this but also to modify and freely distribute those modifications. This term is very much in the spirit of many open source types of software and music. The catch for copyleft protection is that the newly created work be distributed in the same manner and spirit in which it was received. In other words if you were freely given the software, then you must freely provide the improvements and modifications you made to that software. Of course this is a long way from the idea of a software company patent. It is also important that you are sure you understand exactly what you are applying for as far as your patent goes. Different countries will grant patents for different things and those are closely regulated and carefully regarded when it comes to software-know what you are applying for and understand what you are being granted. A software company patent means different things to different people in different places and it nearly impossible to get other countries to honor a patent that they would not have granted at the same time they shouldn't expect other countries to honor patents based on their decision to do so either. One unfortunate circumstance surrounding patents is that there seems to be an unequal and obvious disparity between the haves and the have not's. Patent enforcement for software, unlike literature and music is largely subjective. In literature and music, it is rather obvious that the copyright has been abused or that the work has been copied, this isn't as simple with software which is one other reason that software company patent is such a hotly debated subject in the software industry.